Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.
The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).
ORIGINAL: No idea
So what about units destroyed in, lets say, March 1943? Will they also return?
I see a way to circumnavegate the system in order to not pay APs: expend them all, or as many as you can, before end turn. Or are APs taken away before you get to play a new turn?
All units return. You can be now a bit more bold.
Yes, if you will expend all APs from turn to turn you will get free rebuilds. The only people that can be hurt are those who stockpile 500 APs to build 50 rifle corps on first turn of 1943.
Yes, if you will expend all APs from turn to turn you will get free rebuilds. The only people that can be hurt are those who stockpile 500 APs to build 50 rifle corps on first turn of 1943.
Why not to take that AP´s from future AP´s instead of actual AP´s? For example if i have 30 AP saved for next turn and i lose a corp(15 AP) instead of hurting my saved AP 30-15=15 why not to take from my future 50 AP 50-15=35 so it represent that STAVKA has needed these AP point to create the unit.
And if building new units cost overpass this 50 future AP´s no more units will be created until next turn and you wont have AP points.
Besides technical difficulty to do so, the idea was not to limit the ability to rebuild units, because if you lost dozens of them on one turn it means you are in trouble and it means you really need them to come back ASAP. And I think stockpiling APs should not be possible, as they are better representing day-to-day work of the general staff, doing something all the time, and not staying on holidays for two months and then doing everything overnight. So I think this is a very good solution, that doesn't hurt anyone except AP savers.
I like this - it should encourage players to take risks from 1942 onwards with their mobile units. Those were shredded and rebuilt on a regular basis and I'd rather pay the 20 AP for the corp rather than 15 AP for the brigades, wait two turns etc.
I'm also pretty relaxed at the end of the hoarding idea - I always regarded APs as a crude measure of short term capacity in any case
I think some TOEs were changed to use more StuGs, but Denniss will know better.
emergency HQs? Maybe I was kidding myself but I thought that got the green light?
1.08.05 caused a general rise in losses, but it was too much from the point of generated resources (especially ARM), so they had to return more or less to pre-1.08.05 levels. Also, the ratio of losses was wrong, close to 1:1 due to high retreat losses (which were/are seen on this forum for a long time as major deficiency of the combat system). So I found a way to mitigate these for some groups of units and tests determined the best way to implement these (requiring experience superiority). Bear in mind in late war these will actually help Soviet Guards, Tank and Mechanized formations, as they will be superior to German infantry, and it will be they who will suffer less losses, very useful while doing hasty attacks.
Looking at treatment of wounded by the Germans it seems that most were evacuated to rear areas or out of theater very quickly. I often noticed and exploited to some extent, the fact that multiple attacks on a hex were a more effective manpower killer than a single successful attack. Would it be possible for retreated units to lose only the damaged units from the last attack?
Soviets won't be deprived of APs, since they will get those units rebuilt either for free (if you spend all your APs on the go, like I did every turn, changing generals, upgrading planes, building units and reassigning support, doing HQBUs) or for a half price you would normally pay (if you stockpiled APs for ahistorical mass conversion of rifle divs to corps on a certain date). All in all it's a massive reduction in AP expenditure, especially that this is tied to the fact that it happens only when German destroy your units. Which means you are in trouble, which means you need those APs for something else probably like leaders and reassignments to fix the front. It's a boon to see those units rebuilt for free. It removes another problem people had with the system - the so called AP crunch strategy. It didn't work IRL for the Germans, since Soviets were able to always rebuild destroyed units, it was a question of manpower and armaments, not some virtual APs. Alternative was to grant APs for destroyed units, but it offered too much freedom - you could spend them on something else, unrelated to army structure (and there was risk of losing APs due to 500 limit)
I'm reassured to understand that the Russian will not start a turn with no AP due to the game prioritising unit replacement over the othe admin tasks you mention.
This still leaves the problem of inflated OoBs which greatly favour the Axis, unresolved, actually exacerbated. I doubt that many Russian players will survive to derive any possible benefit from the attack changes in late game. Time will tell.
“Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man.”
-Leon Trotsky
1) No, there was no work done related emergency HQs. I'm not even fully aware what you mean by that. I think it's related to creation of custom HQ units at will in a limited scope (and to replicate late war German OOB from the 1941 starting one, which differs a lot if you compare GC 1941 with GC 1944). Sadly (?) this will not happen.
2) Yes, it's a problem of the model where damaged elements stay/attack/defend with a unit instead of being counted as evacuated (there is just one number of damaged elements, be they damaged earlier or during current combat), thus they may suffer losses multiple times, where they should be at risk only once. Sadly no way to fit in this without invalidating current data structure and reworking thousands of lines of code.
3) You should always see at least 50/60 AP at start of your turn, whatever number of units you lost during enemy turn.
We'll see how the "inflation" ends up, tweaking combat losses up is no problem. Remember Axis now start with 75 000 trucks less, and there are even talks of reworking the Axis rail penalty in .09 to make resupply and getting replacements even harder, especially during blizzard. What I want to see is to have strong Axis units, but more often in low supply, so that their potential is not usable in full along the front. A vicious attack dog, but on a short leash, so to speak.
Somebody with "say" should get the "P" suspension lifted. He can sort this out.
You could, old version, solve the "AP crunch" problem by using the AP's for brigades. Build to about 200 total, before summer '41, then you can make them into RD in May and have about 10 armies all trained up and ready to use.
I'm worried about the new air rules. Its now too easy for the side with air superiority to inflict really heavy losses.
I like that you are no longer having to plan your ground attack missions as the first thing you do and so on but you can do far too much. With the sort of tactical bomber force that many Soviet players will have mid/late game the Germans are going to be wiped out.
For the moment, I've suggested to my opponent a revised version of the old standard house rule. No more than 2 attacks/turn/hex. This still allows a lot of attacks as you can really push your airforce to the limit but I think the 3 attacks coded into the patch are too much.
Basically in my game Pelton has no airforce at the frontline doing anything so I have almost 9k planes, with fully 2/3rds or more being tactical bombers right now so that means a lot of bombing esp since most of my airbases are close to the frontline at this point. Once I get the next turn will do some tracking. Means paperwork as I will have to do it at the end of the turn.
As I need to bomb his units at different phases of operations now not just the start lol.
I think Pelton might now regret disbanding the luftwaffe for manpower. On another note I really like what I've seen in my 10mins of testing of the counterattack/fighting withdrawl stuff that's been added in. Might've finally fixed the loss ratio/retreat loss problem.
ORIGINAL: charlie0311
Somebody with "say" should get the "P" suspension lifted. He can sort this out.
His suspension was for good reason - talent with the game in no way puts someone above the rules. Assuming he can follow the rules, he'll be back soon enough.
morvael you have been recommended for Hero of the Soviet Union for that inspirational comment.
Feature 40 is destined to be our Order 227 and will certainly change the play. It will be interesting to judge the effect on soviet infantry replacements later in the game and whether manpower will become an issue?
I'm still hanging out for two things on my wish list. Formation of mountain corps and reforming tank XXX to mech XXX
Whilst I'm in awe of the amount of work that Morvael an Denniss are doing (+ credit to 2by3 and Matrix for supporting the game so strongly) I'm concerned that these changes won't have been fully tested.
Feature 40 makes me very glad i wasn't planning to play German again. As long as I buy 1 cav xx in November or earlier (I will need to run down my arms points every turn I expect have significant unit losses in the next german turn so all my units come back as freebies), I will have 19 cav xxx to start my blizzard O.
With the ability to rail out 25% more factories each turn (20% cost reduction means 10 for the price of 8) I will have the arms points to rebuild the lost ones. Saving more of the economy will mean that the Russians will have even bigger steamrollers. Arms and manpower are in abundance from some point in '42 (depending on the game) and the only limiting factors were APs and trucks. The AP crunch has gone, and trucks just require Soviets to be careful about the number of tank and mech xxx they have and the size/composition of their air force.
With all respect to Morvael rule 40 won't hurt Russians who store APs for corps conversion because at that stage they are unlikely to be losing significant numbers of units, if any.
I doubt many games under .07 have got past the blizzard to see how that change has reduced German truck levels for their '42 O. However, taking out 75K is likely to make life very difficult especially as the russians will be stronger. I could not help noticing that Pelton only had 69K trucks in the pool in June '45 when playing Smokindave............
web exchange
Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi
Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
